973.7L  63 
DH74V 


yV>/7r  ,  /rx'^AA' 


LINCOLN  ROOM 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 


— ^v^Cvt^  ^  ^Z^c/Cifi^ 


^o^^ 


^<^y^^ 


VINDICATION 


OF 


JUDGE  ADVOCATE  GENERAL  HOLT, 

FROM 

THE  POUL  SLANDEES 

OF 

Traitors,  their  Aiders,  Abettors,  and  Sympathizers, 

ACTING  IN   THE 

INTEREST  OP  JEFFERSON  DAVIS. 


SECOND    EDITION, 

COMPRISING  THE  DEPOSITIONS  OF 


JOSEPH  A.  HOARE    and    WILLIAM    H.  ROBERTS,   and    the  letters  of   Hon. 

JAMES  F.  WILSON,  Chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committtee;  of  Hons. 

GEO.  L.    BOUTWELL  and    D.  MORRIS,    members   of 

said  Committee,  and  of  BVT.  COL.  TURNER, 

and   of  Hon.  E.  M.  STANTON, 

Secretary  of  War. 


\ 


973.711.^ 


WASHINGTON,  Sept.  4th,  18GG. 

To  ALL  Loyal  Men  : 

In  the  name  of  shnple  justice— which  is  all  that  I  claim  from  friencl  or  foe— your 

attention    is  jespectfully  invited  to  the  subjoined    article    from    the    WAsniNOTON 

Chronicle  of  yesterday,  as  presenting  a  perfectly  truthful  vindication  of  myself  from 

the  attrocious  calumny  with  which  traitors,  confessed  perjurers,  and   suborners  are 

now  so  basely  pursuing  me. 

J.  HOLT. 


When  the  minority  report  of  Rogers  upon 
the  examinaiion  made  by  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mif.iee  into  the  tastimoEy  alleiEjed  to  implicate 
Davis  in  t.he  assassination  of  Prisident  LiDcnla 
was  published,  it,  was  so  shameless  in  its  per- 
vernions  and  falsebonds  aud  so  malignantly 
slanderous  ia  its  tone  that,  in  common  with  the 
lojal  press  of  the  country,  we  treated  the  paper 
with  the  silence  and  contempt  which  it  so  well 
deserved.  It  was  felt  Ihatneither  public  justice 
Dor  the  reputation  of  long- tried  and  faithful 
officers  of  the  Government  could  suffer  trom 
utterances  so  foul,  made  in  the  interest  of  the 
rebellion,  and  under  the  inspiration  of  the  re- 
lentless hate  which  traitors  everywhere  bear 
toward  all  loyal  and  true  men.  The  imputation 
upon  the  integrity  of  the  Judge  Advocate  Gent- 
ral  and  the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice  was  not 
indeed  dislmctly  and  broadly  affirmed  in  this 
report,  though  it  was  a^aiji  and  again  covenlj^ 
insinuated.  Eucouragtd,  nowevtr,  by  tbesikuce 
of  the  pressi  and  of  Ju(lj;u  Holt,  this  imputa- 
tion has  now  audaciously  assumed  a  phase  so 
entirely  novel  aud  decided  as  to  make  it  due  to 
public  opinion  that  some  notice  should  be  taken 
of  it. 

It  is  clear  that,  a  conspiracy  has  been  formed 
to  defame  the  Judge  Advocate  General  and  the 
Bureau  of  Mililarj  Justice,  aud  to  invoke  upon 
him  and  the  testimony  which  has  been  dis- 
credited such  a  meKSure  of  popular  condemna- 
tion as,  it  is  hoped,  will  give  some  support  to 
the  movement  now  so  vigorously  pressed  for  the 
release  of  Davis.  At  the  bottom  of  this  con- 
spiracy, or  actively  engagea  iu  executing  its 
purposes,  is  Sanford  Conover,  who,  afcer  hav- 
ing been  fully  proved  guilty  of  subornatiou  ef 
perjury,  has  unquestionably  sold  himself  to  the 
Irieiids  of  Davis,  and  is  seeking  with  them  to 


destroy  the  reputation  of  a  public  officer  whose 
confidence  he  gained,  as  we  shall  hereafter  see, 
by  the  most  solemn  protec lati  >us,  aud  which 
confidence  he  afterward  mos'.  treacherously 
abused.  The  new  feature  in  (he  operation  of 
these  conspirators,  which  is  uovv  atti'ttctiug  at- 
tention, confists  in  the  manufocuire  of  various 
notes  containing  calumniatory  allusions,  with 
,  dates  and  averments,  and  insinuations  to  suit, 
which  purport  to  have  passed  between  Conover 
and  his  suborned  witnesses;  and  that  Conover  is 
directly  engaged  in  this  guilty  work  is  provtd 
by  the  public»tior,  in  conneeiou  with  tiiete 
notes,  of  letters  addreestd  to  himself  by  the 
Judge  Advocate  General,  and  which  could  only 
have  left  bis  possession  to  be. distorted  and 
used,  as  they  have  b^'en,  in  furtherance  of  this 
couspiracy.  We  have  now  before  us  the  Spring- 
flel-'  liepuhlkan  of  August  14,  the  New  York 
Herald  of  Autiu^t  24,  and  Vha  Xatioital  lutelli- 
aencur  of  the  ^HU^e  dete,  in  which  the  notes  re- 
ferred to  apjie.-vr. 

These  are  one  signed  ''M.,"  which  bears  date 
Apiil  17,  18G0,  and  is  addresse'd  to  Conover;  one 
signed  "William  Carupbell,"  and  addressed  to 
Conover,  dated  "ac.  Albans,  Vt.,  Nov.  19,  ISfiS;" 
one  by  the  same  without  date;  one  signed  "Car- 
ter," addressed  to  Ctniovi^r,  and  dated  "Quar- 
termaster's Offic;e.  April  27,  IStG;"  one  signed 
"Joseph  Snevil,"  addressed  to  Conover,  uuder 
date  of  "Westchester  House,  Nov.  14,  1865;" 
one  signed  "S.  Conover,"  addressed  to  Patten, 
under  date  of  Ephrita  Mouoioin  ELousc,  June 
8,  18C6,"  There  are  also  two  brief  letters  from 
the  Judge  Advocate  General  to  Conover,  ibe 
one  dated  March  17,  1806,  and  the  other  April 
20,  1866. 

Now,  wiih  the  excfption  of  the  two  lait- 
named  leticit  ot  thtj  JuOge  Advocate  General, 

IIDNOIS  LIRRflP^ 


we  pronounce  all  these  DOtes  sheer  fabrications, 
manufactured  and  skilfully  adjusted  in  dates, 
etatementB,  intimations,  &c.,  to  sustain  this  in- 
famous raid  on  the  character  of  the  Bureau  of 
Military  Justice.  To  those  thoroughly  conver- 
eant  with  the  history  of  the  Conover  testimony 
these  papers  furnish  in  themselves  conclusive 
evidence  of  the  spurioasness  with  which  we  now 
brand  them.  The  hand  of  Conover,  who  is  as 
fcbrewd  as  he  is  criminal,  is  seen  throughout  in 
adroiily  arranging  meir  suggestions, dates,  &c., 
aid  placing  them  in  such  juxtaposition  to  the 
letters  of  the  Judge  Advocate  General  as  to  seem 
to  give  to  the  latter  a  signification  wholly  dif- 
f;rent  from  that  intended  by  the  writer.  A 
more  cold-blooded  and  devilish  plot  for  the  as- 
sassination of  character  has  never  been  con- 
cocted in  any  age  or  country.  It  was  a  task 
meet  for  self-contessed  perjurers  and  suborners; 
and  zealously  and  faithfully  are  they  keeping 
their  faith  with  the  traitors  in  whose  service 
they  are. 

We  have  not  the  time  or  space  to  point  out  in 
detail  the  internal  proofs  of  the  fabrication  of 
those  notes  of  Conover  and  his  co-perjurers 
which  the  notes  themselves  furnish  when 
viewed  in  their  relation  to  surrounditg  circum- 
stances, and  must  content  ourselves  with  some 
general  observations  corroborating  our  position- 
Take  for  example  the  note  signed  "  Carter," 
and  dated  "  Quartermaster's  Office,  April  27.. 
1866  ;"  It  is,  in  its  every  line  and  letter,  an  un, 
adulterated  lie  so  far  as  Judge  Holt  is  concerned 
and  he  so  pronounces  it.  This  man  Carter  was 
one  of  the  witnesses  produced  by  Conover,  but 
he  has  not  been  sesn,  communicated  with,  or 
even  heard  of,  by  Judge  Holt  since  he  gave  his 
deposition  on  the  9th  day  of  February,  1866 
Tet  this  note  has  been  so  fabricated,  and  placed 
in  date  and  position,  in  such  relation  to  Judge 
Holt's  letter  to  Conover  of  26th  April,  1866,  as 
to  suggest  a  meaning  entirely  different  from  that 
intended  to  be  conveyed  by  its  language.  This 
letter  was  merely  one  of  introduction,  borne  by 
Colonel  Turner,  who  was  sent  to  New  York  for 
the  witnesses,  and  was  addressed  to  Conover, 
who  was  supposed  to  know  ibeir  whereabouts, 
with  a  view  of  inducing  him  to  aid  Colonel 
Turner  in  finding  them  ;  and  it  was  written  be- 
fore there  was  any  ground  known  to  the  Judge 
Advocate  General  for  suspecting  the  frand  vMch 
had  been  j^ractised-  It  was  after  Colonel  Tur- 
ner's arrival  in  New  York,  and  after  his  con- 
ference with  the- witness,  Campbell,  that  the 
subornation  of  perjury  committed  by  Conover 
was  discovered.  Anybody,  after  this  state- 
ment, by  examining  the  note  and  letter  in  their 
relation  to  each  other  as  published,  can  see  how 
ingenious  and  yet  how  atrocious  is  the  use 
which  has  been  made  of  them.    This  note,  in 


its  falsehood,  as  well  as  in  the  vile  and  stealthy 
purpose  it  has  been  made  to  serve,  is  a  fair 
sample  of  the  whole. 

Again,  the  letter  of  Judge  Holt  of  the  17th 
March,  1806,  alluding  to  funds  having  been  re- 
mitted to  Conover  for  Campbell  and  Snevil, 
related  to  a  small  amount  of  money  sent  to  meet 
the  necessary  expenses  of  these  witnesses,  who 
had  been  held  by  the  authority  of  the  Govern- 
ment, and  with  the  understanding  that  their 
expenses  shoulld  be  defrayed — which  in  good 
faith  was  done,  and  properly  done.  Yet,  as  it 
will  be  seen  by  lookicg  at  the  publication  as 
made,  this  letter  is  placed  between  two  fabri- 
cated notts  containing  suggestions  which  were 
evidently  prepared  to  give  to  its  words  an  utterly 
unwarrantable  and  infamous  import.  Ttius  the 
web  has  been  woven  throughout  by  an  logo 
spirit  and  cunning,  but  it  crumbles  into  dust  at 
the  touch  of  honest  truth. 

Whether,  however,  the  notes  of  these  conspi- 
rators have  been  manufactured  for  the  occasion 
— which  we  affirm  as  true  beyond  all  question — 
or  have  been  written  at  the  times  and  by  the 
persons  they  purport  to  have  been  written  by, 
we  declare,  upon  the  authority  of  the  Judge  Ad- 
vocate General  himself,  that  every  word  and 
sjllable  they  contain  calling  in  question,  directly 
or  by  implication  or  insinuation,  the  integrity  of 
his  action,  or  the  sincerity  and  complete  fair- 
ness of  all  he  has  done  in  any  connection,  either 
with  the  witnesses  produced  by  Conover  before 
the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice,  or  the  testimony 
given  by  them,  are  wholly  and  malignantly  false. 
His  conduct,  vindicated  as  it  is  by  documentary 
evidence  ia  the  possession  of  the  bureau,  will 
abide  any  scrutiny  to  which  it  may  be  subjected 
by  friend  or  foe. 

Having  entered  upon  this  subject;  we  deem  it 
but  just  to  the  public  to  give  in  terms  as  brief 
as  possible  a  summary  of  the  history  ot  Con. 
over's  agency,  with  its  results,  so  far  as  it  bears 
upon  the  aspersions  spread  before  the  country 
by  the  knot  of  conspirators  and  villains  we  are 
endeavoring  to  expose.     We  assert,  therefore, 

First.  That  the  inquiry  in  which  Conover  was 
employed  was  not  begun  by  the  Judge  Advocate 
General  until  he  had  received  from  this  man  dis- 
tinct and  repeated  written  assurances  of  the  ex- 
istence of  testimony  criminating  Davis  and 
others,  and  of  his  ability  to  procure  it,  and 
proffering  his  services  to  do  so.  Conover. 
though  now  wholly  degraded,  was  then,  so  far 
as  known  to  the  Government,  without  a  stain 
upon  his  character,  and  the  Judge  Advocate 
General,  as  the  head  of  the  Bureau  of  Military 
Justice,  would  have  been  unfaithful  to  his  duty 
had  he  disregarded  these  assurances  or  taken 
action  less  direct  and  decided  than  he-jid.  Hav- 
ing been  summoned  as  a  witness,  Judge  Holt, 


on  the  18th  of  June  last,  gave  his  sworn  evi- 
dence before  the  Judiciary  Committee   of  the 
.  House  of  Rt-pref entatives,  and  from    this  evi- 
dence we  make  the  following  extracts: 

"In  my  previous  testimony  before  the  com- 
mittee I  stated  that,  from  the  knowledge  derived 
from  the  trial  of  the  assassins  of  the  President 
of  the  apparent  complicity  of  Davis,  Clay,  and 
others  in  that  crime,  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  pursue 
the  inv('stig8tion  further.  I  did  so  on  i.he  first 
opportunity  that  presented  itself.  That  oppor- . 
lunity  was  found  in  the  written  assurances  of  a 
man  known  to  me  under  the-  name  of  Sanford 
Conover;  and  who,  under  this  name,  had  given 
important  testimony  on  the  trial  of  the  assas- 
sins— testimony,  however,  which  did  not  bear 
upon  the  question  of  the  guilt  of  the  parties  on 
trinl  es  concerned  in  the  actual  murder  of  the 
President,  but  related  only  to  the  general  con- 
spiracy charged  to  have  been  formed  for  the 
commission  of  that  crime,  to  which  it  was 
alleged  that  Davis,  Clay,  and  others  were  parties. 

"This  man,  it  seems,  had  been  a  correspond- 
ent of  the  New  York  Tribune  from  Canada;  aud 
it  was  through  Mr.  Gay,  of  the  Tribune — a  citi- 
zen of  well-known  character  for  loyalty  and  in- 
le^'rity — that  he  was  brought  to  the  notice  of  the 
Government  as  an  important  witness.  After  he 
had  given  his  evidence  on  the  trial  of  the  assas 
sins,  from  his  intelligence  atd  apparently  inti- 
mate association  with  rebel  refugees  and  con- 
spirators in  Canada,  I  was  satiffied  that  he  had 
possessed  unusual  opportunities  for  acquiring 
information  in  regard  to  their  plans  and  move- 
ments. Hence,  when  he  wrote  me  alleging  the 
existence  of  testimony  implicating  Davis  and 
others,  and  his  ability  to  find  the  witnesses, 
and  proffering  his  services  to  ao  so,  I  did  cot 
hesitate  to  accept  his  statements  and  proposals 
as  made  in  good  faith  and  entitled  to  credit  and 
consideration. 

'•The  first  letter  which  I  received  from  him 
was  written  from  New  York,  and  bore  date  the 
36ih  of  July,  1865  This  letter  I  have  now  in 
my  hand  for  the  examination  of  the  committee. 
In  it  will  be  found  all  the  details  of  the  assur- 
ances to  which  I  have  just  referred.  The  letter 
is  as  follows; 

"New  Yoek,  July  26, 1865. 

"Brigadier  General  Holt: 

"Dear  Sir:  Believing  that  I  can  procure  wit- 
nesses and  documentary  evidence  sufficient  to 
convict  Jeff.  Davis  and  C.  C  Clay  of  complicity 
In  the  assassination  of  the  President,  and  that  I 
can  also  find  and  secure  John  II.  Surratt,  I  beg 
leave  to  tender  the  Government,  through  you, 
my  services  for  these  purposes. 

"Since  my  appearance  as  a  witness  before  the 
commission,  I  have  been  engaged  to  some  ex- 
tent, on  my  own  account,  in  seeking  further 
evidence  to  implicate  Davis,  Clay,  and  others  ; 
and  I  feel  warranted  in  saying  that  my  efforts 
have  not  been  without  some  success.  I  can 
promise  to  find  at  least  three  witnesses — men  of 
unimpeachable  character — who  will  testify  that 
they  submitted  to  Davis  propositions,  which  he 
approved,  to  destroy  the  President,  Vice  Presi- 
dent, and  Cabinet ;  and  that  they  received  in- 
directly from  the  rebel  government  money  to 
enable  them  to  execute  the  proposed  scheme. 
Letters,  I  am  assured  by  one  of  the  parties  re- 
ferred to,  can  be  adduced  to  corroborate  a  part 
of  their  statements. 

"Two  of  these  persons  can  testify  that  they 
were  present  with  Surratt  at  an  interview  with 


Davis  and  Benjamin  last  spring,  in  which  the 
plot  under  which  Mr.  Lincoln  was  assaesioated 
was  di.-CHssed  and  approved  by  both  futcliona- 
ries. 

"These  men  may  be  relied  on.  As  I  have  al 
ready  said,  their  character  is  unimpeaebable. 
They  despise  and  hate  Davis  now  as  intensely 
as  they  once  admired  and  laved  him.  Besides, 
they  feel  the  necessity  of  doicg  some  meriioii- 
ous  action  to  insure  the  forgiveness  and  pardon 
of  the  Government  they  have  outraged. 

"The  interest  I  have  manifested  in  this  case 
has  been  prompted  solely  by  a  desire  to  serve 
the  Government,  though  I  must  admit  ttiat  it 
has  been  intensified  by  my  haired  of  the  rebel 
leaders.  The  rebellion  has  ruined  me  flcian- 
cially,  and  I  have  suffered  much  at  the  han^is  of 
Davis  &  Co.  It  will  be  no  fault  of  mine  if  ihey 
escape  withot^t  their  just  deserts. 

"You  may  depend  that  I  can  and  will,  if  de- 
sirable to  you  and  the  Government,  accomplish 
all  I  promise,  and  more. 

"If  it  is  not  intended  to  try  Davis  and  others 
for  complicity  in  the  assassination,  I  shall  be 
glad  to  be  sent  after  Surratt.  I  have  ever  be- 
lieved that  I  could  find  him,  and  I  am  confident 
that  I  can  now  devise  a  scheme  for  his  capture. 
I  do  not  enter  into  particulars  because  I  know 
the  value  of  your  time  too  well  to  trouble  yon 
with  a  long  letter.  If  the  propositions  I  submit 
are  entertained,  I  will  call  on  you  and  be  more 
explicit. 

■'Please  favor  me  with  a  reply  at  once,  and  in 
the  meantime,  believe  me  to  be  your  most  obe- 
dient servant,  Sanford  Conover.  . 

"Direct  in  care  of  S.-H.  Gat,  Tribune  " 

On  the  2d  August  thereafter  another  letter,  if 

possible  more  earnest  ana  urgent  in  its  tone» 
was  written  to  the  Judge  Advocate  General  by 
Conover,  who,  in  consequence  of  these  repre- 
sentations, was,  after  a  conference  with  the 
Secretary  of  War  and  with  his  assent,  engaged 
as  an  agent  of  the  Government  to  collect  the 
testimony  of  the  existence  of  which  he  claimed 
to  have  knowledge.  He  was  occupied  some  six 
or  seven  months  in  the  South,  in  the  North,  and 
in  Canada,  and  from  the  various  points  he 
visited  corresponded  with  Judge  Holt,  as  did 
several  of  the  witnesses.  Tfiis  correspondence 
is  preserved  in  the  files  ef  the  bureau,  and  es- 
tablishes beyond  the  possibility  of  question  the 
perfect  good  faith  with  which  the  Judge  Advo- 
cate General  acted;  and  it  also  shows  that,  with 
the  information  thus  communicated  to  him, 
and  which  he  had  no  reason  to  distrust,  he 
could  not  have  done  otherwise  than  continue 
the  inquiry. 

Second.  We  affirm  that,  instead  of  the  Judge 
Advocate  General  having  had  any  ground  for 
suspecting  the  fraud  while  in  progress,  or  hav- 
ing in  any  way  sought  to  conceal  it,  he  endeav- 
ored to  have  the  testimony  subjected  io  every 
possible  test;  and  it  was  through  his  own  direct 
action  that  the  crime  which  bad  been  commit- 
ted was  discovered,  and  that  this  horde  of  per- 
jurers was  finally  dragged  to  the  light.  After 
having,  in  his  testimony  before  the  Judiciary 
Committee,  presented  the  original  correspond- 


6 


ence  t,o  which  we  have  referred,  and  detailed 
the  circumstances  under  whi6h  the  various  de- 
positions had  been  given,  he  concluded  his  evi- 
dence in  the  following  words: 

"There  was  nothing  iu  tlie  previous  history  of 
Sanfoni  Couover,  as  liuown  to  me,  to  excite 
any  distrust,  either  in  his  iotesrity,  in  his  truth- 
fulueee,  or  in  the  sincerity  with  which  he  nad 
made  his  propositions  to  the  Government,  that 
led  to  his  bi^in^  employed  p.s  on  agent  for  the 
coltt-ction  of  the  testimony  which  was  supposed 
to  ixist  in  reference  to  ihe  assassinalio/ii  of  the 
President.  Ou  tbe  contrary,  there  was  much  iu 
fei-<  intelligence  which  was  marked  and  striking, 
and  in  his  apparent  frankness  and  his  known 
coiiuection  with  important  sources  of  iuforma 
tion,  to  inspire  faith  in  his  professions  and 
promises.  There  was  much  also  to  inspire  this 
faitii  iu  his  correspondence  with  me,  as  already 
exhibited,  while  apparently  engaged  in  the  diffi- 
culc  and  responsitjlo  duty  imposed  upon  him. 
TCiat  correspondence  was  characterized  by 
unusual  inlelligence,  by  great  variety  of  detail, 
and  by  a  naturalness  which  seemed  to  protect  it 
from  criticism;  and  ray  confidence  in  the  testi- 
mony was  strengthened  by  my  knowledge  that 
it  was  in  accord  with  and  seemed  to  be  iua  large 
degree  a  natural  sequence  from  other  facts  which 
had  been  tesiifled  to  as  having  occurred  in  Can- 
ada, by  witnesses  known  to  the  Government, 
and  whose  reputation  has  not  been,  and  cannot, 
it  is  believed,  be  suecessfully  assailed. 

"Upon  1  lie  passage  of  the  resolution  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  appointing  a  com- 
mittee t'>  investigate  and  ascertain  what  testi- 
mony ■  xisied  in  regard  to  the  complicity  of 
DiVis '1  ihrt  assassination  of  the  President,  I 
appeni'  ■!  before  this  committee,  in  obedience  to 
its  su.iuaufio,  and  gave  my  testimony,  and  pro- 
duced 0  'fore  it  the  depositions  to  which  I  have 
referred,  together  with  the  reports  which  I  made, 
and  wliicu  reports,  with  the  opinions  therein 
expressed  upon  the  questions  involved,  were 
based  upon  these  depositions,  and  upon  the  other 
proofs  therein  presented  and  commented  on ; 
upon  which  proofs  these  depositions  were  but 
cumulative,  though  strongly  so. 

"Decided,  however,  as  was  my  confidence  in 
the  iruthfulness  of  these  depositions,  I  was  not 
willing  that  the  committee  should  accept  my  es- 
timate of  them,  or  base  any  action  of  their  own 
solely  on  that  estimate.  Hence  I  urged — cer- 
tainly the  chairman  and  I  think  another  member 
of  the  committee— that  I  should  be  directed  or 
requested  to  bring  before  them  the  more  im- 
portant of  these  witnesses  produced  by  Conover, 
who  were  believed  to  be  within  the  reach  of  the 
Government,  in  order  that  by  their  cross-exami- 
nation, their  bearing  while  testifying,,  and  by 
such  other  tests  as  they  might  be  euijjected  to, 
the  committee  should  be  enabled  to  determine 
for  themselves  what  degree  of  credit  their  evi 
deuce  was  entitled  to. 

"In  consequence  of  this  suggestion  of  mine, 
and  of  its  having  been  repeated  and  urged,  I  re- 
ceived the  direction  of  the  Hon.  Mr.  Wilson, 
chairman  of  the  committee,  to  send  for  these 
■witnesses,  or  the  more  important  of  them.  I  ac- 
cordingly sent  to  the  city  of  New  York  Brevet 
Colonel  Turner,  judge  advocate,  giving  him,  as 
I  uow  remember  it,  the  names  of  Campbell, 
Snevil,  McGill,  Wright,  Patten,  and  Mrs. 
Douglas?;  these  being  the  witnesses  I  had  rea- 
son to  believe  might  be  obtained  within  a  rea- 
sonable time.    It  is  barely  possible  that  the 


name  of  Patten  was  not  embraced  in  this  list, 
owing  to  my  supposing  him  to  reside  iu  Saint 
Louis;  but  the  most  important  of  the  witnesses 
were  certainly  included.  Colonel  Turner,  on- 
proceeding  to  New  York,  had  an  interview  with 
Campbell,  who  has  repeatedly  been  referred  to 
by  me;  and  in  a  conversation  with  Colonel  Tur- 
ner, Campbell  declared  that  the  testimony 
which  ho  had  given  in  his  deposition  before  the 
Bureau  of  Military  Justice  was  false,  and  that 
it  had  been  fabricated  by  or  under  the  super- 
.  vision  of  Sanford  Conover.  This  I  learned  from 
Colonel  Turner,  and  I  learned  he  made  the  same 
statement  at  the  same  time  in  regard  to  tbe 
testimony  of  Snevil,  and  expressed  the  opinion 
that  the  other  witnesses  who  had  been  produced 
by  Conover  had  also  sworn  falsely  and  under 
assumed  names.  Colonel  Turner  brought 
Campbell  on  to  Washington,  and  I  then  sug- 
gested that  Mr.  Wilson,  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, should  telegraph  for  Conover,  ia  order 
that  he  and  Campbell  might  be  confronted  in 
their  examination,  and  opportunity  thus  af- 
forded the  committee  of  determining  the  question 
of  credibility  at  issue.  Conover  accordingly 
came  and  went  before  the  committee,  and  while 
undergoing  examination  there,  Campbell  was 
introduced,  and  having  been  sworn,  he  stated 
that  his  deposition  given  before  the  Bureau  of 
Military  Justice  was  false  in  all  respects,  and 
was  wholly  and  completely  the  fabrication  of 
Conover,  who  then  being  present  replied,  under 
oath,  that  this  declaration  of  Campbell  was  mu- 
Irue,  but  declined  to  offer  any  explanation. 
After,  however,  Campbell  had  been  withdrawn, 
Conover  suggested  to  the  committee  as  a  reason 
why  he  (Campbell)  had  made  his  statement 
that  he  had  probably  been  corrupted",  and  sup- 
posed he  could  make  more  by  falsifying  his  for- 
mer testimony  than  he  could  by  sustaining  it. 

"I  said  to  Conover,  immediately  after  his  ex- 
amination closed,  that  I  was  utterly  astounded 
at  the  evidence  Campbell  had  given.  His  reply 
was,  "You  cannot  be  more  so  than  I  am."  I 
then  added:  "You  see  the  position  in  which  you 
are  placed;  uow,  if  what  is  charged  against  you 
is  false,  your  only  mode  of  vindication  is  to 
bring  before  the  committee  the  witnesses  whom 
you  produced,  and  whose  depositions  were  taken 
before  the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice,  in  order 
that  they  may  be  examind  and  reaffirm  their 
testimony."  He  said  he  would  proceed  to  New 
York  with  the  officer  of  the  committee,  and  as- 
sist him  in  finding  the  witnesses;  and  would,  as 
I  understood  him  to  say,  return  with  them  to 
Washington.  He  left,  as  I  was  told,  with  the 
officer  of  the  committee;  but  on  arriving  at 
New  York  separated  himself  from  him,  and 
was  not  seen  by  him  afterward;  and  up  to  thi* 
time  he  has  not  communicated  with  me,  nor  has 
he  made  any  effort,  as  I  believe,  to  produce  the 
witnesses,  nor  has  he  offered  any  vindication  of 
his  conduct. 

"This  action  of  his,  added  to  the  declarations 
under  oath  of  Campbell,  followed  uu.  as  they 
were  afterward,  by  the  testimony  of  Snevil  as 
to  the  utter  falsity  of  the  depositions  which  he 
and  Campbell  had  given,  left  on  my  mind  a 
strong  impression  than  Conover  had  been  guilty 
of  a  most  atrocious  crime,  committed  u.jder 
what  promptings  I  am  wholly  unable  to  deter- 
mine. I  employed  him  under  no  contract  for 
any  stipulated  compensation.  He  had  no  reason 
from  me  to  believe  that  he  would  receive  more 
for  his  labor  in  the  event  of  his  success  than  in 
the  event  of  his  failure  to  discover  the  testimony 


which  he  alleged  existed;  nor  had  he  authority 
to  give  to  the  witnesses  any  other  assurance 
than  that  they  should  not  be  personally  compro- 
mised by  speaking  the  truth.  He  only  had 
reason  to  believe,  and  was  so  assured,  that  all 
expenses  would  be  paid  and  that  a  fair  com- 
pensation for  the  services  performed — both  in 
view  of  their  importance  and  of  the  extreme 
danger  to  which  it  was  supposed  they  might 
expose  him — would  be  made,  but  nothing  be- 
yond this. 

"  Although  but  two  of  the  witnesses,  to  wit : 
William  Campbell  and  Joseph  Snevil,have  been 
found  arid  produced,  and  have  declared  the 
falsity  of  their  depositions ;  yet,  considering 
ihe  conduct  of  this  agent  of  the  Government  as 
exposed  and  explained,  it  is  believed  that  the 
same  discredit  which  seems  to  attach  to  these 
two  depositions  of  Campbell  and  Snevel  should 
attach  to  all  the  depositions  given  by  the  wit- 
nesses brought  to  the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice 
for  examination  by  Conovcr;  and  I  would  there- 
fore suggest,  unless  the  grounds  for  discrediting 
these  depositions  be  in  some  way  removed,  that 
all  that  testimony  be  withdrawn  from  the  con- 
sideration of  the  committee.  The  witnesses 
whose  depositions  under  this  view  would  be 
withdrawn  are  the  following:  John  McGill, 
William  Campbell,  Joseph  Snevil,  Farnham  B. 
Wright,  Sarah  Douglass,  Mary  Knapp,  W.  H. 
Carter,  and  John  H.  Patten. 

"  I  append  hereto,  as  a  part  of  this  my  depo- 
sition, official  copies  of  all  the  letters  and  tele- 
grams of  Sanford  Conover  and  others  hereto- 
fore referred  to,  the  whole  being  marked 
'  Exhibits  to  the  deposition  of  J.  Holt,  Judge 
Advocate  General.' 

*'  I  deem  it  proper  to  remark  (which,  possibly 
I  may  in  effect  have  done  previously)  that  I  con- 
ferred freely  with  these  witnesses,  before  and 
while  examining  them;  that  they  appeared  to 
possess  the  ordinary  amount  of  intelligence,  and 
certainly  assumed  perfect  self-possession  and 
frankness  of  manner,  and  seemed  to  be,  so  far 
as  I  could  judge,  under  no  improper  influence; 
anrt  there  was  nothing  either  in  the  testimony 
which  they  gave — regarded  in  the  light  of  other 
evidence  in  possession  of  the  Government,  and 
which  has  not  been  successfully  controverted — 
or  in  their  manner  while  deposing  calculate^!  in 
any  degree  to  excite  doubt  as  to  their  truthful- 
ness ;  and  I  did  not  at  any  time  question  the 
sincerity  and  honesty  with  which  they  were 
speaking.  The  disclosure  made  by  Campbell  to 
Colonel  Turner  was  the  first  intimation  which  I 
had  received  of  the  shameless  fraud  which,  it  is 
alleged  by  two  of  the  witnesses,  has  been  com- 
mitted upon  the  Government  by  Conover." 

It  will  be  observed,  by  reference  to  the  report 
of  the  Judiciary  Committee,  that,  in  accordance 
with  the  view  above  expressed  by  Judge  Holt, 
they  gave  to  the  Conover  testimony  no  conside- 
ration whatever.  After  having  given  this  evi- 
dence, the  Judge  Advocate  General  made  an 
tlaborate  report  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  present- 
ing a  full  history  of  Conover's  ageucy,  and  de- 
claring the  testimony  introduced  by  him  to  be 
discredited;  and  formally  withdrew  all  the depoei- 
tinns  fro^  the  consideration  of  the  Government' 

Third.  While  a  wily  and  profligate  endeavor  is 
made,  through  the  fabricated  notes  of  which  we 
have  spoken,  to  create  the  impression  that  large 


sums  of  money  have  been  bestowed  upon  these 
perjured  witnesses  and  their  suborner,  Conover- 
with  a  vievf  to,  or  as  a  reward  for,  their  corrup_ 
tion,  this,  like  every  other  vile  insinuation  con, 
tained  in  the  papers,  is  utterly  false.  We  are 
authorized  by  the  Judge  Advocate  General  to 
Bay  that  nothing  bejond  what  was  deemed  ne. 
cessary  to  meet  the  actual  and  reasonable  ex. 
penscsof  these  witnesses  was  paid  them.  They 
were  long  held  by  the  Government,  awaiting  the 
trial  which  it  was  anticipated  might  be  ordered 
in  the  cases  of  Davis,  Clay,  &c.,  and  while  thu^ 
waiting  their  expenses  were  properly  met  by  the 
Government;  and  this  was  ii\  accordance  with 
the  rule  pursued  in  many  other  cases— a  rule 
often  absolutely  essential  to  maintain  the  in- 
terests of  public  justice.  As  to  Conover,  his  ex- 
penses were  also  paid,  and  he  was  allowed,  in 
addition,  what  was  regarded  as  a  just  com  pen 
sation  for  his  services  during  the  six  or  seven 
months  during  which  his  agency  for  the  bureau 
continued,  and  no  more.  All  averments  or  11- 
sinuations  that  a  dollar  was  ever  paid  to  these 
men  for  any  other  thau  the  purposes  mentioned 
are  wholly  untrue. 

Thus  is  exposed  the  true  nature  of  this  elabo- 
rate but  transparent  conspiracy,  which,  in  aim- 
ing to  serve  end  to  save  the  chief  of  the  traitors, 
has  not  heei'ated   to  attempt  to  overthrow  the 
official  chsfecter  of  the  Judge  Advocate  Gene- 
ral.    And  while  this   attempt  must,  of  course, 
be  as   fruitless  as  il  has  been  desperate,  the  en- 
deavor of  the  conspirators  to  protect  Davis  fiora 
the  charge  of  complicity  in  the  assassination  of 
President  Lincoln   must  be  alike  iu  vain.     It  is 
true  that  that  portion  of  the*  testimony  brought 
forward  by  Conover  is  at  this  time  discredited; 
and  the  friends  of  Divis,  in  the  confusion  raised 
by  their  outcry  agiir.st  the    Jud^e   Advocate 
Gt-neral,  would  hope  to  have  it  understood  that 
this  is  all  the  material  testimony  upon  which 
the  charge  is  based.     But,  in  point  of  f.ict,  it  is 
but  one  branch  of  the  body  of  proof  which  has 
accumulated  in  the  case.     Long  before  the  pro- 
duction of  the  testimony  in  queftion  a  tribunal, 
composed  of  officers,  of  the  first  rank  and  intel- 
ligence, had,  after  the  fullest  invnesligatiou,  and 
upon  proof    which  has  not  been,  and,  it    ia 
believed,     cannot     be     assailed,     pronounced 
the    head    of    the    rebellion     guilty    of    the 
crime    which     crowned     its     infamous     his- 
tory.   Since  Iheu    other  and   equally  reliable 
evidence    has    been    presented ;    and   the    Ju- 
diciary   Committee    of    the   House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, in  whose  repoit  it  is  set  forth,  have 
declared,  upon  an  examination  of  this  and  Ihe 
previous  proofs,  and  excluding  from  their  con- 
sideration that  now  discredited,  that  "there   is 
probable  cause  to  believe  that  he  (Davis)  waa 
privy  to  the  measures  which  led  to  the  commis- 


8 


sion  of  the  deed."  This  verdict  has  been  ac- 
cepted by  the  great  masp  of  thoughtful  and 
loyal  men  tbroughout  the  country,  and  cannot 
but,  we  are  assured,  become  the  deliberate  con- 
clusion of  history.  And  the  present  attempt  to 
do  away  with  the  judgment  which  has  been 
passed  upon  Davis  as  an  assassin,  by  seeking 
to  make  the  impression  that  that  judgment  rests 
solely  or  largely  upon  the  testimony  produced  by 
Conover,  and  thus  interpose  a  cloud  of  doubt 
and  uncertainty  before  the  mass  of  proof  which 
remains  unimpfscbed,  must,  we  are  persuaded, 
be  readily  comprtbended,  and  everjwhtre  ex- 
posed and  denounctd.  We  affirm,  as  ourcon- 
clading  remark,  that  this  judgment,  long  since 
formed,  is  based  in  no  degree  on  thistesiimony, 
which  was  never  given  to  the  country  ULtil  dis- 
credited, but  that  it  has  for  its  foundation  a  vo- 
lume of  evidence,  documentary  and  otherwise, 
in  the  possession  of  tbeGovemmtnt,  which  has 
not  been  controverted,  but  which,  standing  as  it 
does,  intact,  poiMs  to  Davis  as  involved  in  the 
assassination  of  the  President,  with  "the  slow, 
nn moving  finger"  of  a  condemnation  which  no 
clamors,  however  loud  or  frauiic,  of  traitors  and 
their  sympathizers,  c-in  shake  or  disturb. 

The  following  is  the  letter  of  August  3,  re 
ferred  to  in  the  foregoing  article  : 

New  York,  August  3,  1862,  [1S65.] 

General  :  I  proposed  by  letter  ^ew  days  ago 
to  find,  for  the  good  of  the  Government  and 
people,  John  H.  Surratt,  one  ot  the  conspirators, 
and  to  produce  uuimpeacbable  evidence  sufii- 
ciimt  to  convict  Davis,  Clay,  and  oihers  of  com- 
plicity in  the  assassination  of  Mr.  Lincoln. 

I  solicited,  indeed  especied,  an  early  reply, 
but  was  disappointed.  Surratt  has  since  been 
captured,  (so  the  papers  say.)  so  tnat,  of  course, 
my  services  in  that  direction  will  not  be  required. 

Probably  you  have  also  sufficient  evidence  to 
convict  Davis,  Clay,  tt  al,  without  the  testi- 
mony— I  should  say  evidence— I  proposed  to 
adduce,  the  wimessts  I  proposed  to  produce,  and 
the  facts  that  you  could  educe  under  my  sugges- 
tion from  certain  dieliyalisis. 

If  it  is  all  so  I'm  glad.  But  will  you  not  be 
kind  enough,  on  receipt  hereof,  to  inform  me  by 
telegraph,  directed  to  Fifth  Avenue  IIotel,whether 
or  not,  I  can  be  of  further  se.-vice  to  the  Govern- 
ment. 

If  I  cannot  be  of  further  service  I  propose  to 
go  to  Mexico:  and  my  last  day  if  jou  do  not  desire 
more  of  me,  in  New  York,  wiL  be  next  Friday 
Saturday. 

I  hope  I  can  be  of  further  service.  I  more 
than  hope  that  I  shall  hear  from  you  (by  tele- 
graph) before  Saturday.  If  I  do.not  I  shall  as- 
sume that  I  can  be  of  no  further  service,  and 
act  accordingly.    Your  obedient  servant, 

Sanford  Conoter. 
Brigadier  General  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  Gene- 
ral, Washington,  D.  C. 

P.  S.— This  is  the  fourth  letter  that  I  have 
written  you  without  having  received  a  reply.  I 
do  sincerely  hope  that  I  may  receive  an  answer 
to  this,  if  not  to  those  that  preceded  it. 

Respectfully,  8.  C. 


War  Department, 
Bureau  of  Military  Justice. 
WAsnrNGTOx,  November  24, 1806 
To  ALL  Loyal  Men  :  In  a  former  vindication 
of  myself  which  appeared  in   the   Washington 
CuKONiCLE  of  3d  of  September,  and  was  adopted 
by  me  as  "perfectly  truthful,"  extracts  from  my 
deposition  before  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  were  given  as  present- 
ing a  clear  and  succinct  history  of  the  "Conover 
testimony,"  and  of  my  relation  to  it.    As  a  part 
of  that  history  was  also  furnished   the  letter  of 
Conover  to  me,  which  led  to  his  emplojmeut  by 
the  Government,  and  in  which  he  gave  distinct 
assurances  as  to  the  existence  of  evidence  impli 
eating  Davis  and  oihers  in  the  assassination  of  the 
President,  and  declared  his  ability  to  produce  the 
witnesses,  and  made  an  offer  of  his  services  to 
do  so.     In  that  vindication   it  was   also  alleged 
that — with  the  exception  of  my  own  brief  notes 
to  Conover,  and  which  in   themselves  afforded 
no  color  of  imputation  against  me— all  the  letters 
and  notes  which  had  been  published  by  the  New 
York  Herald,  and  afterward  by  other  papers,  and 
which  had  been    made  the  basis  of  an  arraigji 
men:  of  my  official  integrity,  were   forged  and 
their  statements   utterly  false.     It  was  further 
affirmed  "that  nothing  beyond  what  was  deemed 
necessary  to  meet  the  actual  and  reasonable  ex- 
penses of  these  witnesses  was  paid  them;  that 
they  were  long  held  by  the  Government  a  waiting 
the  trial   which  it  was  anticipated  might  be 
ordered   in   the  cases  of  Davis,  Clay,  &c.,  and 
while  thus  waiting  their  expenses  were  properly 
met  by  the  Government,   and  that  this   was  iu 
accordance  with  the  rule  pursued  in  many  other 
cases — a  rule  often  absolutely  essential  to  main- 
tain the  interests  of  public  justice."    Since  the 
date  of  that  vindication  proofs  have  been  taken  in 
support    of    its    most    important    averments, 
and  they  are  now  submitted  as    unanswerable 
evidence  of  the  malignity    and    foulness    with 
which  I  have  been  traduced.    Protesting  against 
being  condemned    without    having  been   first 
heard,  I  respectfplly  ask  that  these  proofs,  which 
will  speak  for  themselves,  may  beread  and  con- 
sidered by  all  who  are  willing  to  know  the  truth. 
The  genuineness  of  my  own   brief  business 
notes  to  Conover,  so  far  as  published,  has  never 
been  denied,  but  has  been  constantly  admitted. 
Their  language  allows  of  no  construction  to  my 
prejudice,  and  they  have  been  pressed  into  the 
service  of  these  conspirators  only  through  the 
forged  letters  with  which  they  surrounded  them 
for  the  purpose  of  perverting  and  destroying 
their  true  meaning.    I  say  they  are  genuine,  so 
far  as  published,  because  I  know  not  what  forged 
notes  or  letters  purporting  to  be  mine  may  now 
be  in  the  hands  of  this  horde  of  villains,  or  may 
hereafter  be  fabricated  by  them  for  use  against 
m3. 


9 


As  the  forged  letters,  &c.,  referred  to — and 
which  have  been  made  the  ground  of  calumni- 
ous accusations  against  me  in  connection  with 
the  "Cocover  tefitimouy" — all  first  appeared  as 
original  matter  in  the  New  York  Herald,  which 
continued  their  publication,  with  opprobrious 
imputations  on  myself,  aUer  they  had  been  pro- 
nounced to  he  spurious;  and  as  that  journal  has 
declared  that  it  is  'in  no  way  indebted  to  Cono- 
ver  for  these  docnmeute,"  and  as  Conoverhim- 
eelf — by  whom  or  to  whom  they  purport  to  have 
been  written — utterly  rcpuciiaUt.  ibem,  it  must, 
in  the  absence  of  explauation  or  disclaimer,  be 
held  tbct  the  New  Yoik  Herald  and  its  rebel 
coadjutors  are  directly  responsible  for  their 
fabrication,  and  for  the  slanderous  and  infamous 
tiee  which  has  been  made  of  thtm. 

That  falsehood,  though  guii^ed  by  the  shrewd- 
est of  scoundrel!^,  is  sure,  sooner  or  later,  to 
trip,  Is  6-bown  by  the  fact  that  ihete  conspira 
tors  made  Conover  seem  to  write  ms  from 
Philadeli..bia,  on  the  ISih  of  December,  1865,  a 
long  an(^  criminative  Ittler,  whereas,  in  truth, 
as  is  proved  by  a  telegraphic  despatch  from  him 
on  file  in  the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice,  he  was 
then  at  Montreal,  Canada,  and  communicated 
with  me  on  that  very  dny  from  that  point. 

Attention  is  invited  to  the  statement  of  the 
witness,  Jii-^eph  A.  Hoare,  that  after  he  gave 
hL3  Oep  iMiiuu  I  introduced  him  to  the  Presi- 
dent, to  whom  the  deposition  was  read,  and  that 
the  President,  as  well  as  Secretaries  Seward  and 
Stanton,  who  were  present,  conversed  with  him 
in  regard  to  the  remaikable  statements  it  con- 
tained. This  is  mentioned  as  evidence  that  in 
taking  and  collecting  this  testimony  no  con- 
cealment was  practised.  On  the  contrary,  the 
depositions,  as  taken,  without  exception,  were 
at  once  communicated  to  the  Secretary  of  War, 
and  by  him  to  the  President  and  Cabinet,  so  that 
the  exi^ten'-•e  aud  char<«cler  of  these  depositions 
were  as  well  known  to  these  high  officials  as  to 
myself,  aod  If  any  of  tbem  expressed  distrust  of 
the  entire  truthfulness  of  the  testimony — which 
then  stood  wUolly  uuiuipeached— I  have  not 
been  able  after  diligent  inquiry  to  asceitsin  it. 
Feeling  myself  entitled  to  it  under  the  articles 
of  war,  I  made  a  formal  written  demand  through 
Secretary  Stantou  for  a  court  of  ioquiry,  with  a 
view  to  a  judicial  examination  of  all  the  charges 
which  have  been  made  against  me,  alike  in  con- 
nection with  the  "Conover  testimony"  and  the 
trial  of  the  assassins  of  the  President.  In  my 
letter  to  the  Secretary  I  said  : 

"As  these  accusations— utterly  false  aud 
groundless  as  I  pronounce  tbem  to  be,  and  as 
they  are  believed  to  be  known  to  those  who  gave 
them  utterance  to  be— are  of  the  gravest  im- 
port, and  directly  call  in  queedon  my  official 
integrity,  and  must,  if  credited,  destroy  all  con- 
fidence in  me  as  a  public  officer,  and  in  the  bu- 
reau over  which  I  preside,  it  seems  to  be  a  solemn 


duty  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to 
have  them  investigated,  and  a  record  of  the 
truth  made.  My  official  honor  and  that  >>f  this 
bureau,  as  well  as  that  of  the  military  tervicj 
with  which  I  am  connected,  imperatively  de- 
mand this.  I  seek  and  challeDf;e  the  severest 
scrutiny  of  my  official  conduct  in  all  the  matters 
to  which  these  atrocious  accusations  relate 
which  can  be  instituted  in  the  interefats  of  truth 
and  justice. 

"I  therefore  respectfully  but  earnestly  £sk  that 
under  the  articles  of  war  a  court  of  inquiry, 
composed  of  officers  of  high  rank  and  national 
reputation,  he  appointed,  whoie  duty  it  shall  he 
to  thoroughly  examine  each  and  all  of  said 
chartjes  as  preferred  against  me,  and  that  said 
court  shall  be  required  not  merely  to  repoit  tbe 
facts,  but  to  give  their  opinion  on  ihu  merits  of 
the  case." 

By  reference  to  the  letter  of  the  Secretary  of 
War  it  will  be  seen  that  the  President  has  declined 
to  order  this  court,  alleging  that  he  ^'deems  it  un- 
necessary for  my  vindication,'''  This  action  of 
the  President  must  be  accepted  as  a  full  recogni- 
tion on  his  part  of  the  groundlessness  of  these 
accusations,  and  neci=S6arily  of  the  baseness  of 
those  who  have  made  them.  Bu'.  while  this  is 
60,  I  cannot  but  regret  that  the  court  was  not 
ordered,  since  I  believe  that  the  public  houQr, 
deeply  involved  in  my  official  action,  would 
have  bten  best  guarded,  as  would  have  been  my 
own,  by  making,  as  could  easily  have  been  done, 
through  sworn  and  unimpeachable  testimony, 
such  a  record  of  all  the  proceedings  and  conduct 
impeached  as  would  have  silenced  forever  the 
poisoned  tongues  alike  of  open  traitors  and  of 
those  renegade  Unionists  who,  ignobly  crouctt- 
ing  before  the  Still  living  spirit  of  the  late  re- 
bellion, are  seeking  favor  and  power  by  abjectly 
pandering  to  its  resentments.  But  while  teas  pre- 
vented from  making  my  defence  under  circum- 
stances which  cnuUl  not  have  failed  to  command 
the  public  coulldence,  I  bave  no  fears  for  the 
issue.  The  truth,  of  which  I  sought  to  make  a 
judicial  record,  is  mightier  than  all  its  enemies 
combined,  and  though  it  may  be  and  often  is 
slow,  it  is  ever  surein  the  end  to  astert  its 
mastery  over  falsehood  and  fraud. 

From  the  moment  I  entered  on  my  present 
position  the  Secretary  of  War  has  had  continual 
and  thorough  knowledge  of  my  official  cosduct, 
and  a  loyal  people  will  not  hesitate  to  give  to 
his  language  in  my  behalf  the  weight  to  which 
it  is  so  justly  entitled.  Such  words,  so  emphatic 
and  honorable  to  me,  and  prompted  by  so  com- 
plete a  CO '^prehension  of  my  action,  and  uttered 
by  such  a  man  and  such  a  patriot  as,  amid  the 
sublime  labors  and  responsibilities  and  perils  of 
the  times,  Edwin  M.  Stanton  has  proved  him- 
self to  be,  may  be  safely  poised  in  my  defence 
against  all  the  curses  and  fetid  vituperation 
which  can  come  from  the  rebel  throat— tbat 
open  sepulchre  of  defamation— from  now  until 
doomsday. 


10 


It  is  not  proposed— for  I  too  well  understand 
how  hopeless  would  be  the  effort — to  correct  the 
mendacious  habits  of  the  •wicked  mea  who 
coined  these  calumnies  against  me,  or  who  have 
been  and  are  still  industriously  engaged  in 
giving  them  circulation.  So  far  as  they  are 
concerned,  I  simply  aim  yet  further  to  expose 
and  blacken  their  guilt  before  the  world  by  aug- 
menting, through  conclusive  proofs,  the  light 
of  that  truth  against  which  they  have  offended 
and  still  delight  to  offend;  and  having  done 
this,  to  leave  them  under  the  brand  of  public 
scorn  to  pursue,  as  they  doubtless  will,  the  lie 
they  make  and  love,  and  whieh  seems  to  be  at 
onee  the  aliment  and  the  banquet  of  their  lives. 
This  vindication,  therefore,  be  it  understood,  is 
not  at  all  offered  to  traitors  here  or  elsewhere, 
their  aiders,  abettors,  or  sympathizers;  nor  is  it 
made  with  any  hope  or  desire  of  convincing  or 
conciliatiDg  them — for  by  my  loyalty  and  faith- 
fulness to  duty  I  have  long  since  earned  their 
appeaseless  hate,  and  I  spurn  and  defy  it — but 
it  is  offered  to  the  honest  and  true  everywhere, 
who,  though  they  may  feel  no  interest  in  my 
own  fate,  will  nevertheless,  I  am  sure,  feel  an 
enduring  interest  in  the  protection  of  those 
principles  of  justice  and  loyalty,  honor  and  fair 
dealing,  which  are  the  safeguards  of  every  man's 
life  and  reputatiou,  and  which  have  been  so 
Bhameleesly  violated  in  my  person. 

J.  Holt, 
Judge  Advocate  General. 

[  From  the  New  York  Herald  of  Sept.  26, 1866. 1 
War  Depajrtment, 
Bureau  of  Military  Justice, 
Washington,  D.  C,  September  22, 1866. 
Mr,  James  Gordon  Bennett : 

Sir:  In  the  Washington  correspondence  of 
New  York  Herald  of  yesterday  are  found  two 
letters,  one  purporting  to  have  been  written  to 
m3self  by  S.  Conover,  under  date  of  '"Philadel- 
phia, December  13, 1865,"  and  the  other  stated 
to  have  been  enclosed  in  the  former,  and  pur- 
porting to  have  been  written  by  M.  N.  Harris  to 
'  Friend  Conover,"  under  date  of  "Harritburg, 
D-cember  11, 1865,"  which  letters  are  offered  in 
tuiJ.ort  of  an  atrocious  calumny  heretofore 
published  against  me  bv  this  same  correspondent, 
and  from  which  ni^  ••vindication"  has  appeared 
in  the  Chronicle  of  this  city  and  other  jouruals; 
and  I  am  now  "challenged  to  deny  the  genuine- 
ijHfS  and  truthfulness  of  these  letters." 

In  reply,  1  declare  that  until  I  saw  these  let- 
ters in  the  Herald  of  yesterday  I  had  never  seen 
or  heard  of  them,  or  of  either  of  them,  or  of  their 
conieuts;  nor  were  these  letters  or  either  of 
them,  or  the  subject  matter  of  either,  or  the 
man  Harris,  ever  alluded  to  by  Conover  in  his 
correspondence,  or  in  any  of  his  numefous  per- 
Bonal  conferences  with  me.  I  pronounce  them, 
therefore,  to  be  base  fabrications,  made  fo.-  the 
purpose  of  adjustment  to  my  note  to  Conover 
under  date  of  15th  December,  1865,  with  a  view 
of  giving  to  that  note  a  totally  unwarrantable 
eigniflcation.  That  note  is  alleged  by  your  cor- 
respondent to  have  been  written  in  reply  to  Con- 
over's  pretended  letter  to  me  of  "Philadelphia, 


ISth  December,  1865;"  which  allegation  is 
wholly  untrue.  This  note  of  mine,  on  the  con- 
trary, was  in  answer  to  a  telegraphic  communi- 
cation— called,  it  seems,  by  me,  a  "letter" — sent 
to  me  by  Conover  from  Montreal,  under  elate  of 
"13th  of  December,  1865,"  in  which  it  was 
stated  that  he  was  there  with  three  very'impor- 
tant  witnesses  and  expecting  another,  and  re- 
quired more  funds,  and  asking  a  remittance, 
and  the  Sl50  mentioned  in  my  note  was  euCiOsed 
to  hiru  to  meet  the  necessary  expenses  in  bring- 
ing itiese  four  witnesses,  with  himself,  to 
Washington.  Neither  the  note  itself  nor  the 
remittance  had  any  other  object  than  this,  ex- 
cept the  simple  oue  of  urging  his  speedy  return 
to  Washington. 

Thus  the  ttale  artifice  heretofore  exposed  and 
denounced  of  mannfacturlBg  letters  and  notes 
for  the  purpose  of  adjusting  them  to  my  own 
brief  communications,  iu  order  to  change  their 
import,  is  here  revived,  and  this  audacious  work 
will  BO  doubt  be  continued  so  lung  as  the  public 
shall  show  itself  sufficiently  credulous  or  gullible 
to  give  to  these  forged  papers  credit  or  consider- 
ation. I  cannot  but  believe  the  American  peo- 
ple too  sensible  and  too  honest  to  be  the  dupe  of 
a  trick  so  shallow  and  shameless.  All  imputa- 
tions calling  in  question  the  strict  integrity  of 
my  official  action  in  any  connection  with  the 
"Conover  testimony,"  as  it  is  termed,  which 
may  arise  out  of  these  papers,  or  from  any  ether 
publication  or  source  whatever,  I  pronounce 
malignantly  false  in  their  every  intendment  and 
implication. 

You  will  do  me  an  act  of   simple  justice  by 
giving  the  foregoing  a  place  in  your  columns. 
J.  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  General 

Deposition  of  Joseph  A.  Hoare,  taken  ai  ibe 
office  of  Colonel  Turner,  judge  advocate,  Wash- 
ington, D.  C,  October  18,  1866: 
District  of  Columbia,   Washington  City,  ss. 

Joseph  A.  Hoare,  being  duly  sworn,  deposes 
as  follows: 

Question.  Did  you  give  your  deposition  before 
the  Judge  Advocate  General  in  Washin^toD,  D. 
C,  and  if  so,  when,  and  in  relation  to  what  mat- 
ter? 

Anfi7.er.  I  gave  my  deposition  at  the  olQce  of 
the  Judge  Advocate  General,  Washington,  D. 
C,  November  4,  1865,  relative  to  the  assassina- 
tion of  President  Lincoln  and  the  alleged  com- 
plicity of  Jefferson  Davis  aod  others  therein; 
and  I  gave  it  in  the  name  of  William  Campbell. 

Q.  \Vere  you  examined  as  a  witness  before 
the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
seHtatives;  if  so,  when,  and  the  subject  ma-ler 
thereof? 

A.  I  was  examined  as  a  witness  before  said 
committee  on  the  8th  day  of  May,  A.  D.  1866, 
and  I  then  and  there  swore  that  the  deposition 
I  had  made  at  the  office  of  the  Judge  Advocate 
General,  November  4,  1865,  was  entirely  false, 
and  that  the  substance  of  it  was  fabricated  bv  a 
man  by  the  assumed  name  of  "Sanford  Cono- 
ver," but  whose  real  name  is  Charles  A..  Dun- 
ham; audi  now  swear  that  said  deposition  was 
and  is  false,  and  was  fabricated  by  said  Cono- 
ver, as  above  stated,  and  committed  to  memory 
by  m  J  self,  as  prepared  by  him— though  not 
given  to  the  Judge  Advocate  General  precisely 
in  the  language  prepared  by  Conover — a  change 
in  the  language  being  caused  by  the  questions 
propounded  by  tte  Judge  Advocate  General. 

Q.  Within  two  or  three  months  there,  has 
appeared  in  the  New  York  Herald,  Xatio7ial 
Intelligencer,  and  other  papers,  two  letters  pur- 


11 


portins;  to  have  been  written  by  yourself,  in  the 
name  of  "William  Campbell,"  to  Sanford  Con- 
over,  of  which  letters,  as  published,  the  follow- 
ing are  copies.  The  first  letter  is  as  followf-: 
"St.  Albans,  Vt.,  November  19, 1865. 
"I  hlk-e  jusi  parted  with  the  party  I  thought 
would  do  to  represent  Lamar.  He  will  go  into 
the  game  and  swear  all  that  is  wanted,  but  be 
places  his  price  at  a  pretty  high  figure.  He 
wants  -S3,000,  and  says  he  won't  sell  his  soul  for 
less.  Yon  told  me  not  to  go  above  $1,500, 
but  the  judee  told  me  alterward  that,  if  neces- 
sary, I  could  go  8500  more.  But  even  this  is 
far  below  the  mark.  What  am  I  lo do?  I  have 
wiittfu  the  judge  how  the  matter  stands,  and  I 
hope  you  will  urge  him  lo  come  to  the  terms. 
Dick  is  a  good  fellow,  and  we  can  depend  on 
him  without  fear,  and  he  has  the  faculty  liars 
need  mott— a  mighty  good  memory.  I  hope  to 
receive  a  message  from  you  to-morrow  teiliug 
me  to  strike  the  bargain.  At  any  rate  let  me 
know  how  to  act  as  soon  as  possible. 

"William  Campbell." 

The  copy  of  the  second  letter  published  is  as 
fjllowt;: 

"Dear  Sir:  I  have  been  trying  to  see  you  for 
several  days,  but  hear  that  you  are  out  of  town. 
I  fchall  If  ave  this  at  staiion  A,  that  you  may  get 
it  as  soon  as  you  return.  I  am  in  great  need  of 
more  money;  my  last  inveetmenis  did  not  pay, 
and  I  am  dead  broke,  and  so  is  Snevil.  The 
judge  told  me  when  I  last  saw  him  to  communi- 
cate with  him  only  through  you,  and  I  don't 
like  to  write  him;  but,  I  must  have  money  in  a 
few  days.  Get  him  to  send  me  8500,  for  nothing 
less  will  be  of  any  use  to  me.  I  wi.sh  I  could 
get  in  bulk  all  I  am  to  receive,  and  then  I 
couid  get  into  safer  businces;  but  I  suppose  you 
are  all  afraid  that  if  you  should  give  me  all  in 
my  hands  at  once  I  could  not  be  found  when 
most  wanted.  I  don't  like  to  be  suspected,  but 
anything  is  better  than  being  poor,  so  I  will 
take  what  I  can  get,  but  of  course  not  less  than 
$500.  Don't  keep  me  waiting,  for  God's  sake, 
for  I  shall  hardly  be  able  to  raise  cocktails  and 
cigars  till  I  hear  from  you. 

""Truly  yours,  William  Campbell." 

Slate  whether  the  said  letters,  or  either  of 
thern,  were  or  was  written  by  youreelf. 

A.  I  did  not  write  either  of  them,  and  they 
are  forgeries,  and  wholly  and  entirely  false  in 
every  particular. 

Q.  Were  you  in  St.  Albans,  Vermont,  in  No- 
vember, 1865;  and  if  eo,  on  what  business? 

A.  I  was  in  St.  Albans  in  November,  1865, 
under  an  engagement  with  the  Judge  Adv(  cate 
General,  to  And  a  witness  by  the  name  of  Lumar. 
Sanford  Conover  and  myself  had  represented  to 
the  Judge  Advocate  General  that  said  Lamar 
was  in  Canada,  and  that  I  could  fled  him;  and 
hence  I  was  sent  to  get  him.  I  wrote  lo  the 
Judge  Advocate  General  from  St.  Albans  on  the 
15; h  of  November,  1865,  stating  the  progress  I 
had  madein  finding  Lamar,  and  hadnr)t  yut  suc- 
ceeded in  finding  him.  I  went  from  St.  Albans 
to  Boston,  and  wrote  again  to  the  Judge  Advo- 
cate General,  from  that  city,  Novembc-r  29, 
1865,  in  which  I  stated  that  Lamar  had  been 
found,  and  that  he  and  myself  might  be  expected 
in  Washington  the  latter  part  of  the  week  there- 
after. I  further  swear  that  I  knew  no  man  by 
the  name  of  Lamar,  and  tha':  the  fraud  was 
practised  upon  the  Judge  Advocate  General  by 
the  instigation  ajid  procurement  of  Sanford 
Conover. 

Q.  Was  the  deposition  you  gave  at  the  office 


of  the  Judge  Advocate  General,  November  4, 
1865,  written  out  precisely  as  given  by  you? 

A.  The  deposition  was  written  out  by  the 
Judge  Advocate  correctly,  as  stated  lo  him 
by  me. 

Q.  When  you  gave  said  deposition,  or  after, 
did  you  in  any  way  intimate  lo  the  Judge  Advo- 
cate General  that  your  deposition  was  not  true? 

A.  I  did  not ;  and  I  gave  '  him  no  reason  to 
doubt  the  integrity  of  my  action. 

Q.  Will  you  stale  whether  the  money  paid  you 
from  time  to  lime  was  more  than  enough  to  pu.y 
your  expenses  during  the  time  you  were  held  as 
a  witness  by  the  Government? 

A.  I  regarded  myself  held  as  a  witness  six  or 
seven  months;  also  as  an  agent;  and  the  amount 
I  received  did  not  exceed  $650,  which  was  not 
more  than  my  expenses,  including  my  jour- 
ney to  St.  Albans  and  Boston,  and  Washington 
twice. 

Q.  Had  you  or  not  frequent  conversations 
with  Conover  about  the  witncsRes  he  was  pro- 
curing to  go  before  the  Bureau  of  Military  Jus- 
tice ? 

A.  I  had. 

Q  There  has  appeared  in  the  Ne  w  York  Herald 
and  other  papers  a  letter  purporting  to  have  been 
written  by  S.  Conover  to  Judge  Advocate  Gene- 
ral Holt,  ULder  date  of  "Philadelphia,  December 
13, 1865,"  and  which  letter  professed  to  have 
enclosed  in  it  a  letter  from  M.  N.  Harris  lo 
"  friend  Conover,"  under  date  of  "  Harrisburg, 
December  11,  1865,"  which  letters  the  Jndge 
Advocate  General  has  denounced  as  forgeries. 
Now,  will  you  state  whether  or  not,  in  your  con- 
versations wi'h  Conover,  he  ever  mentioned-the 
name  of  M.  N.  Harris,  or  that  he  was  ever  en- 
gaged in  getting  te.stimuny  at  Philadelphia  or 
Harrifburg? 

A.  Conover  never  spoke  lo  me  about  any  pjan 
by  the  name  of  M.  N.  Harris,  and  I  know  no 
such  person,  and  I  never  knew  of  his  beiuir  in 
Philadelphia  or  Harrisburg  lo  obtain  testimony. 
The  letter  refened  to  of  December  13,  1865,  is 
before  me,  as  published  in  the  New  York 
Herald,  and  the  following  is  a  copy: 

"PniLADELPniA,  Decembtr  13,  1865 

"General:  I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  report 
that  I  have  succeeded  beyond  my  expectati'iiis. 
Besides  the  parties  I  had  in  view,  we  can  ount 
on  two,  and  perhaps  four,  others,  who  will  tes- 
tify to  all  that  may  be  required.  After  eecuiing 
Harris,  who  will  prove  the  most  important  wit- 
ness we  have  yet  had,  he  assured  me  that  he 
had  several  friends  in  Harrisburg  wh.  m  ue  was 
confidHDt  would  assist  us,  and  as  the  expense 
would  t;ot  be  great,  I  deemed  it  advisable  to  de- 
spatch liim  at  once  to  confer  with  them.  He  is 
discreet  and  shrewd,  and  no  fears  r.eed  be  enter- 
tained of  his  blundering.  I  received  a  leit  r 
frora  him  this  morning,  which  I  enclose,  and 
this  attemoon  I  shall  set  ont  lo  LX-nuin."  the 
parties  he  refers  to.  If  satisfied  that  they  will 
answer  our  purpose,  I  shall,  as  so^^n  as  I  can  get 
them  thoroughly  posted,  cotn-.'.  on  with  thcin. 
I  am  )i'«r'ul,  if  we  engage  all  that  wt  iiuvi-  m 
hand,  that  my  funds  will  not  bold  out.  so  U.ut 
you  had  better  send  me  $1C0  mi>re,  to  be  used, 
if  needed. 

"Direct  your  Ittter  simply  to  Philadelphia,  as 
I  put  up  from  time  lolime  where  I  lind  it  irio.'t 
convenient  lo  keep  track  of  the  witnesses  al- 
ready in  hand. 

"Respectfully,  your  obedient  eervact, 

"b.  Conover. 
"Brigadier  General  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  Gen- 
eral." 


12 


Q.  Wbcre,  in  point  of  fact,  was  Sanfird 
Couover  ca  the  ISih  of  Di-cember,  18G5.' 

A.  According  to  tuy  bbft  knowledge  and  in- 
foraiation  hi  was  on  that  day  in  Canada  ;  and  I 
bave  DOW  before  me  a  telegraphic  despatch  from 
Baid  Conover  to  the  Judge  Advocate  General, 
dated  "  Montreal,  December  13,  1865,"  from 
•which  ii  ajjpears  that  on  the  day  he  pretended 
to  have  written  to  the  Judge  Advocate  General 
from  Philadelphia,  he  was,  in  fact,  in  Montreal, 
Canada. 

Q.  Afier  you  gave  your  deposition  before  the 
Judge  Advocate  General,  did  he  or.not  accom- 
pany 5  0U  to  the  President  of  the  Unittd  State?, 
and  introduce  you  to  him,  end  also  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  State,  Mr.  Seward,  and,  if  bi),  ftate 
what  occurred  at  that  interview  ? 

A.  He  did;  and  after  I  had  been  introduced  he 
read  my  deposition  to  the  President  and  Mr. 
Seward,  and  then  the  President  and  Mr.  Seward 
conversed  with  me  relative  to  the  statements  the 
depostion  contained.  Duiing  this  interview  ihe 
Secretary  of  War,  who  was  then  present,  also 
addressed  some  questions  to  me  relative  to  my 
deposition.  J.  A.  Hoare. 

Sworn  and  subscribed  at  Washington,  D.  C, 
this  18th  day  of  October,  1866,  before  me, 

Geo  C.  Thomas. 
Notary  Public. 

Deposition  of  William  H.  Roberts,  taken  at 
the  office  of  Colonel  Tamer,  judge  advocate, 
Washington  city,  October  18,  1866: 

William  H.  Ruberts,  being  duly  sworn,  de- 
poses as  foUovTs: 

Quf  stion.  Did  you  at  any  time  give  your  de- 
posiiion  at  the  office  of  the  Judge  Advocate 
General,  in  Washington,  D.  C,  and  if  so,  in  re- 
lation to  what  matter? 

Answer.  I  did  yive  my  deposition  bt fore  the 
Judge  Advocate  General  on  the  fourth  day  of 
November  186.5,  relative  to  the  assassination  of 
President  Lincoln  and  the  alleged  complicity  of 
Jefferson  Davis  and  others  therein.  I  gave  said 
deposition  in  the  name  of  "Joseph  Soevil," 
and  at  the  same  time  that  Joseph  A  Hoare, 
alias  "Campbell,"  gave  his.  I  further  say  that 
afterward,  in  the  month  of  May,  18G6,  I  was 
examined  as  a  witness  before  the  Jiiriiciary 
Committee  of  the  House  ot  Representatives, 
having  been  duly  subpoenaed  to  atteid,  and 
then  and  there,  being  duly  sworn,  I  testified 
that  the  (  eposition  gifen  by  rue  before  the 
Judge  Advocate  General  on  the  fourth  day  of 
November,  1S65,  was  wholly  and  entirely  false, 
and  that  the  same  was  fabricated  by  v.  person 
who  assumed  the  name  of  "Sanford  Conover," 
but  whose  real  name  is  Charles  A.  Dunham, 
and  I  now  reiterate  that  said  deposition  was  and 
is  false,  and  was,  in  its  subttaoce,  fabricated  by 
said  Dunham,  alias  "Conover."  The  said 
Dunham  wrote  out  what  he  desired  me  to  swear 
to,  and  I  committtd  the  same  to  memory  from 
his  manuscript,  and  then  repeated  the  same 
(though  not  precisely  in  the  same  language) 
substantially  as  my  deposition  in  reply  to  the 
questions  asked  by  the  Judge  Advocate  Gene- 
ral. The  said  manuscript  I  had  in  my  posses- 
sion some  time  afterward,  and  finally  I  gave  it 
up  to  said  Dunham,  alias  Conover,  and  at  his 
request.  I  had  said  manuscript  in  my  pocket  at 
the  time  I  gave  my  deposition,  but  I  did  not  ex- 
hibit it  or  refer  to  it  while  at  the  oflice  of  the 
Judge  Advocate  General  in  any  way.  I  further 
state  that  my  deposition  was  given  in  answer  to 
questions  addressed  to  me  by  the  Judge  Advo- 


cate Gi-Df  ral,  and  that  my  answers  to  said  ques- 
tions were  correctly  written  down  by  him. 

Q.  How  long  a  time  did  ycm  consider  your- 
self held  as  a  witness  by  the  liovernment? 

A.  Between  six  and  seven  months. 

Q.  What  amount  of  money  was  paid^you  hy 
the  Government  or  its  agents? 

A.  Not  exceeding  the  sum  of  four  hundred 
dollars,  which  was  really  not  enough  to  meet 
my  expenses  during  the  lime.  The  understand- 
ing was  with  the  agent  of  the  Government  that 
my  expenses  should  be  paid,  which  to  this  time 
has  not  been  done. 

Q.  In  the  New  York  Herald  of  August  24, 
1866,  and  subsequently  in  other  papers,  thtre 
appeared  a  letter  purporting  to  have  been  writ- 
ten by  you  under  the  name  of  "Joseph  Snevil," 
to  Sanford  Conover,  of  date  "New  York,  No- 
vember 14,  1865,"  of  which  the  following  is 'a 
copy,  as  published: 

"Westchestbr  House. 
"New  York,  November  14,  1865. 

' 'iI/>.  •  Savford  Conover : 

"Dear  Sir:  I  have  been  looking  for  more 
than  a  week  for  the  ^500  draft  promised  me 
from  you  or  the  judae,  but  have  been  .disap- 
pointed. I  dou't  think  I  have  been  treated  ex- 
actly on  the  square,  for  Campbell  has  had  more 
by  nearly  81,000  than  I  have,  and  yet  I  stretched 
my  conscience  just  as  much  as  he  did,  and  my 
t-stimony,  as  you  and  the  judge  both  said,  was 
jast  as  important  as  his. 

"I  don't  like  to  find  fault,  but  I  like  still  less 
to  beg  or  to  borrow,  as  I  am  of)liged  to,  from 
Campbell,  when  I  ought  to  be  just  as  well  oflf 
as  he. 

"I  don',  mean  to  complain,  for  I  know  you 
have  much  to  attend  to,  and  can't  do  everythintc 
at  once,  but  as  all  the  rest  have  been  better  paid 
than  myself  I  ough'.  not  to  be  forgot. 

"Please  do  not  fail  to  send  draft  by  return 
mail,  for  you  know  this  is  an  awful  place  to  be 
without  money,  and  your  petitioner  will  ever 
pray.  Respectfully,  yours, 

"Joseph  Snevil." 

Now,  will  you  state  if  said  letter  was  written 
by  yourself,  or  not? 

A.  I  did  not  write  said  letter;  it  is  a  forgery, 
and  all  its  statements  are  false. 

Q.  Have  you  had  frequent  conversations  with 
"Conover"  about  the  witnesses  he  was  pro- 
curing for  the  Government? 

A.  I  bad  conversations  with  him  often. 

Q  Did  your  ever  hear  him  mention  the  name 
of  M.  N.  Harris,  and  did  you  know  or  ever  hear 
of  Couover's  being  engaged  in  Philadelphia  or 
Harri?-burg  in  looking  up  witnesses? 

A.  Conover  in  his  frequent  conversations  with 
me  never  mentioned  any  person  by  the  name  of 
M.  N.  Harris,  and  I  have  no  knowledge  that 
Conover  was  ever  in  Philadelphia  or  Harrisburg 
in  search  of  witnesses,  and  I  am  confident  that 
if  he  had  been  there  he  would  have  told  me. 

Q.  While  giving  your  deposition  before  the 
Judge  Advocate  General,  or  at  any  other  time 
while  held  as  a  witness,  did  you  communicate 
or  intimate  to  him  in  anywise  that  your  deposi- 
tion was  not  truthful,  or  did  you  make  any  com- 
munication to  the  Judge  Advocate  General  from 
which  he  could  have  suspected  the  truthfulness 
of  your  testimony  or  integrity  of  yourcharacter? 

A.  I  did  not,  and  I  gave  no  intimation  to  any 
ofilc;"r  of  the  Government  that  said  deposition 
was  false  until  I  disclosed  it  to  Colonel  Turner, 
judge  advocate,  in  the  month  of  May,  1866.  who 
was  sent  to  New  York  by  the  Judiciary  Com- 


13 


rni'tt^e  of  the  Hou?e  to  procure   the  attend  ?nce 
of  witiifSi-es.  W.  H   Roj-.ehts. 

[G.  C.  T  ,  October  18,  1866.] 
bwijru  and  su^iecribed  at  VVashint(ion,  D.  C, 
ihis  iSth  October,  1SC6,  before  me, 

Geo.  C.  Thomas, 
Notary  Public. 

Letter  from  Hou.  James  F.  Wilson,  chairman 
of  the  Jadiciary  Committee  of  the  Hout-e  of 
Representatives : 

Faiufield,  Iowa,  September  29,  1860. 

My  Ueak  SiK  :  Ou  my  return  home  from  a 
canvass  of  my  district,  I  received  your  favor  of 
the  7th  inst. 

I  am  not  surprised  at  the  attack  made  on  you 
by  the  friends  of  Jefferson  Davis,  for  tbey  will 
spare  no  pains  to  shield  him  from  the  pr.nalty 
of  his  great  crime.  But  1  know  that,  ther-^  is 
no  just  ground  upon  which  to  base  snch  attacks. 

In  the  discharge  of  my  official  duiies  relative 
to  the  charge  of  complicity  in  the  plot  to  destroy 
the  life  of  President  Lincoln,  made  against 
Davis  and  others  in  the  proclamation  of  Presi- 
dent Johnson,  I  acquired  personal  knowledge  of 
your  whole  course  of  action  concerning  the  case. 

After  the  House  of  Representatives  had  di- 
rected the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  to  investi- 
gate the  charge  made  by  President  Johnson  in 
Eaid  proclamation  against  Davis  and  others,  you 
manifested  the  utmost  solicitude  in  favor  of  a 
thorough  sifting  of  all  the  testimony  in  the  pos- 
session of  the  Bureau  of  Military  Justice,  and 
especially  that  which  had  been  collected  through 
the  instrumentality  of  Sanford  Conover.  Tou 
earnestly  urged  the  committee  to  send  for  the 
witnesses  whose  depositions  yoa  had  taken  in 
the  Conover  branch  of  the  case,  notwithftaod- 
iEg  ihose  depositions  seemed  fair,  truthful,  a^d 
no  suspicion  had  been  cast  upon  them. 

The  committee  not  knowing  where  said  wit- 
nesses could  be  found,  you  proposed  to  send 
Colonel  Turner  to  New  York  city  in  order  to 
discover  the  whereabouts  of  the  witnesses  and 
to  procure  their  attendance.  Your  proposition 
was  approved  by  the  committee,  and  Colo>jel 
Turner  visited  New  York.  His  visit;  and  inves- 
tigQlion  led  to  a  suspicion  that  Conover  had 
practised  a  fraud  upon  the  authorities.  This 
only  increased  your  earnestness  in  asking  for  a 
complete  sifting  of  the  testimony  given  by  the 
witnesses  procured  by  Conover.  A  plan  was 
agreed  upon  by  a  part  of  the  committee  and 
yourself  to  have  Conover  confronted  before  the 
committee  by  one  of  his  most  important  wit- 
nesses. This  plan  was  carried  out,  and  resulted 
in  discrediting  the  Conover  branch  of  the  case. 
No  one  more  promptly  recognized  this  fact  than 
yourself,  and  yoa  so  stated,  acd  advised  the 
withdrawal  from  the  consideration  of  the  com- 
mittee of  the  testimony  of  all  the  witnesses 
procured  by  Conover.  The  report  of  the  com- 
mittee in  no  sense  rests  upon  the  t-ttimony  of 
these  witnesses— that  testimony  was  wholly  dis- 
regarded. 

Your  action  in  this  matter  was  most  fair  and 
impartial,  and  afforded  satisfactory  evidence  that 
jour  only  desire  in  the  premises  was  to  arrive 
at  the  truth.  I  wish  the  whole  country  could  be 
as  well  informed  of  your  conduct  in  this  regard 
88  is  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary— you  would 
need  no  other  defence.   Yours,  truly, 

James  F.' Wilson, 
Plon.  Joseph  Holt,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Letters  from  Hoas.  George  S.  Boutwrll  and 


D.    Morris,   members  of    the    Judiciary  Com- 
miuee  of  the  House  of  Representatives: 

Groton,  Mass.,  September  13,  1866. 

Sik:  I  have  observed  the  studied  auempts 
makug  by  the  friends  of  Jefferson  Divis  to 
injure  your  reputaiion  by  imputing  to  you  im- 
proper coudnct  in  your  efforts  to  afCertain  itie 
trutb  and  l)ring  to  jusiicr  all  those  iho  were 
ooucenied  in  tbe  assaBfination  of  President  Lin- 
coip.  A<*  a  member  of  the  Judiciary  Co.-umittee 
of  ttie  House  of  Representatives  I  had  know- 
Itd^iC  of  all  the  proceedings,  and  I  citn  bear  ready 
and  full  testimony  to  your  disinterested,  im- 
}).^iLia!,  and  patriotic  seivices  in  aid  of  ju.siice. 
It  is  true  ibat  certain  witnesses  who  riepo.-ed 
before  you  afterward  rel^ac^^d  their  statemer.t^, 
but  the  evidence  is  conclusive  that  joa  t)elieved 
their  origiual  statements  to  be  true,  and  tha'  if 
tbey  were  false  you  were  ttie  party  Oect^ivfd. 

The  commiitte  had  ample  opp  «rtuiiliit-s  ti 
witness  your  conduct  and  bearing,  and  I  am 
persuaded  that,  with  the  exception  of  Mr. 
Rogers,  all  approved  and  justified  yimr  conduct 
in  every  particular.  I  have  no  floul>t  that,  the 
machinations  of  your  enemies  will  fail  signally, 
as  surely  they  ought  to  fail. 

I  am,  very  truly,  Geo   S   Boutwell. 

Hon.  Joseph  Holt,  Wasbiugtou,  D  0. 

Penn  Yan,  N.  Y  ,  October  15,  1S66. 
Colonel  E.   TV.  Dejinis: 

My  Deak  Sir:  Yours  of  the  3d  of  September 
ult.,  with  the  enclosed  article  from  tun  Wash- 
ington Chronicle,  came  to  baud  during  my 
absence,  and  by  accident  it  was  mislalcl.  U 
has  just  come  to  luy  attention,  and  I  ij^sieu  to 
reply,  that  the  article  fri.m  the  CniiO.NiCLS,  aa 
far  as  my  knowledge   is  concertied,  is  accaraie. 

I  think!  was  with  the  Ju'iicijry  Committee  at 
each  meeting  when  Judge  Advocate  Holt  was 
present.  I  noticed,  and  remarked  to  members 
of  the  committee  at  the  time,  that  Judge  Holt 
evinced  a  candor  and  a  patriotism  equal  to  any- 
thing I  had  ever  witLCssed.  His  actions  aud 
asseitious  evinced  a  desire  to  elicit  the,  truth 
aud  only  the  truth.  He  was  williuu;  aud  appa- 
rently anxious  to  aid  the  committee  iu  the  in- 
vestigation, aud  he  did  it  in  a  way  that  ius-pired 
in  me  the  profoundest  respect.  I  sincerely  hope 
that  the  Government  may  ever  be  favored  with 
a  judge  advocate  as  iuteUigent,  disinterested  for 
self,  and  as  vigilant  to  promote  the  interes.ts  of 
the  Government,  and  develop  the  truth,  as  was 
manifested  oy  Judge  Advocate  Holt. 

I  write  in  great  haste  as  I  leave  town  in  a  few 
moments,  and  am  truly  yours, 

D.  MoiiKis. 

Latter  from  Brevet  Colonel  L.  C.  Turner, 
judge  advocate,  on  duty  in  WashiDLriotj: 

Wah  Department, 
Washington  City,  September  10,  1S66. 
General  J.  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  Gtncral: 

General:  I  have  the  honor  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  8tu  instant,  iu 
which  you  state:  '=  A  base  endeavor  is  being 
made  through  the  disloyal  press  of  the  coHLtiy, 
acting  in  the  interests  of  Jefferson  Davis  and 
the  rebi-'llion,  and  in  co-operation  with  Sanlord 
Conover,  to  impress  the  public  mind  with  the 
belief  that  I,  in  some  way,  countenanced  or  was 
involved  with  Conover  ii:  the  subornation  of  the 
witnesses  produced  by  hitn  before  the  Bureau  of 
Military  Justice,  and  whose  testimony  is  now 
discredited  as  having  been  fabricated  by  him- 
self. 


14 


Ton  also  state:  "A  further  imprcFsion  is 
eougQC  lo  be  made,  in  utter  disregard  of  the 
facts,  that  the  crime  thus  committed  by  CoDover 
was  LOt  discovtrea  by  any  e^ency  of  iiiioe,  but 
in  despite  of  endeavors  on  my  part  tJ  vi'^^^nt 
the  exposure." 

And  inas-much  as  I,  your  agent  and  acting 
under  y<  ur  directions,  was  c;>Dncctert  wiih  ex- 
posing aud  disclosing  the  falcity  of  the  testi- 
mony produced  by  Cnnover  and  his  snbornaiion 
of  witiu-sses,  you  nqaest  me  to  "malie  a  brief 
but  difrtinct  statement  of  all  that  occurred  in 
conni'Ction  with  this  testimony,  in  any  manner 
beariuK  on  the  atrocious  calumnies  agaicst 
me,"  &e. 

In  compliance  with  jour  request  I  rtepeclfuUy 
state: 

That  the  26'-h  of  April  last  jon  informed  me 
that  certain  ^icrsors  had  made  deposi'.tons  be- 
fore the  Bartau  of  Military  Justice  relative  to 
the  alleged  connection  of  Jefif.  Davis,  C.  C. 
Clay,  aiid  others  with  the  assassination  of  Presi- 
dent Lincoln;  that  the  Judiciary  Committee  of 
the  House  of  Representatives  were  invt^siigating 
the  matter,  and  you  were  unwilliug  that  the 
depositions  should  be  received  tis  testimony 
■without  being  tested  and  verilied  by  tbe  personal 
examination  and  cross-examination  of  the  wit- 
nesses t)y  the  committee. 

You  seemed  anxious  that  the  w.rn esses  should 
be  produced  hetore  the  commitiae,  and  direct td 
and  instructed  me  to  proceed  to  New  Yotk  and 
obtain  their  attendaoce. 

You  furnished  me  with  tbe  names  and  proba- 
ble whereabouts  of  the  ivitntssef,  viz: 

Sanford  Conover;  post  offi.^a  address,  Station 
A.  New  York. 

Joseph  Saevil;  post  office  address.  Station  A, 
New  York. 

William  Campbell,  Faruhom  B.  Wright,  and 
John  McGiU,  supposed  to  be  in  or  about  New 
York;  John  H.  Paiten,  supposed  to  be  in  St.. 
Louis;  Sarah  Douglas  and  Mary  Knapp,  sup- 
posed to  be  in  Canada. 

Yon  advised  that  Wright  should  be  sent  to 
find  Fatten,  and  Conover  to  go  to  Canada  for 
the  two  women.  You  sent  a  telegram  to  Snevil 
to  meet  me  at  the  Astor  House  ttie  morning  of 
the  27th  of  April,  aud  gave  me  a  letier  of  intro- 
duction to  Conover,  of  which  tne  foliowiog  is  a 
true  copy  : 

"  Was  Department, 
"  Bureau  of  Military  Justice. 
"  WAsniNGTON,  D.  C,  April  20,  1866. 

" JJfr.  Sanford  Conover: 

"  Dear  Sir  :  Tbis  will  be  presented  to  jou  by 
Colonel  I'urner,  judge  advocate,  who  will  com 
mnnicate  with  you  fully  in  reeard  to  the  ha-i- 
ness  which  takes  him  to  New  York.  The  Judi- 
ciary  Comrniiteeof  the  House  of  Representatives 
are  anxious  to  secure,  at  as  early  a  day  es  possi- 
ble, the  attendance  of  the  witnesses  named  in  a 
list  in  Colonel  Turner's  hands,  end  I  write  to 
request  tbat  you  will  at  once  use  all  your  efforts 
to  Secure  that  result.  You  probably  ktow  the 
whereabouts  of  most  of  them,  and  torongh  yoar 
personal  exertions,  aided  by  others,  may  succeed 
in  bringing  these  witnesses,  or  at  least  the 
greater  part  of  them,  before  the  committee.  I 
saw  Mr.  Wilson  this  morning,  who  read  me 
your  letter,  and  it  is  at  his  instance  that  I  write 
you,  having  no  doubt  but  that  from  the.  infortaa- 
tion  you  have,  and  your  past  faithfulness,  you 
will  be  ooth  able  and  willing  to  do  in  the  in- 


terest of  truth   and  public  justice  what  is  now 
required  of  you. 
"  Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servaLt, 

"J.  Holt, 
"Judge  Advocate  General." 

And  the  sole  object  of  said  letter  was  my  iu- 
iroduc'.ion  to  Conover,  and  have  him  aid  in  pro- 
curing the  witnesses  before  the  committee. 

All  the  witnesses  were  unknown  to  me,  and  I 
was  not  before  advised  that  their  depositions 
had  been  taken,  and  there  was  no  intimation 
that  there  was  any  suspicion  entertained  by  any 
one  tbat  their  testimony  wss  not  perieetly 
truthful  and  reliable. 

I  arrived  at  the  Astor  House  oh  the  morning 
of  April  27th  last,  and  after  repeated  delays  unil 
annoying  difficulties  ot)tairied  interviews  with 
Conover,  Campbell,  and  Suevii,  and  a  coiiy  of 
my  report  in  this  regard,  made  at  your  request, 
to  the  Judiciary  Committee,  is  herewith  en- 
closed. 

Through  the  disclosures  of  Campbell,  and 
otherwise,  1  asceitaioed  undonbtingly  that  all 
the  witnesses  procured  by  Conover  before  the 
Bureau  of  Military  Justice  deposed  under  ficii- 
liiius  names;  that  taeir  verified  statements  were 
false,  and  fabricated  by  Conover,  and  that  Cono- 
ver was  the  author  of  the  atrocious  scheuie 
which  resulted  in  such  astounding  perjuries  and 
and  subornalions. 

Thursday,  May  3,  I  returned  to  Washington, 
and  Campbell  accompauiea  me.  After  report- 
iug  to  you,  and  your  interview  with  Campbell,  a 
telegram  was  sent  at  your  instance  to  Comiver, 
nqneeting  his  immediate  attendance  before  the 
Jiiiticiary  Committee. 

Conover,  having  no  suspicion  that  Campbell 
and  myself  were  in  Washington,  came  on  at 
once,  and,  jrreatly  to  his  surprise,  he  was  con- 
fronted by  Campbell  in  the  Judiciary  Cjmmittee 
room,  which  was  the  result  of  an  arrangement 
between  you,  Mr.  Wilson,  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  Judiciary,  and  myself. 

After  Campbell  had  been  examined  Conover 
asserted  that  the  statement  of  Campbell — that 
the  testimony  given  !■>  him  before  the  Bureau 
of  Military  Justice  ha.)  been  fabricated  by  him 
(Conover) — was  falsf,  and  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee permitted  him  to  return  to.  New  York  in 
charge  of  the  SergKi'it-sl-Arms  to  procurt- the 
attendance  of  the  witnesses  whose  deposiiiODS 
had  been  taken  wi  h  those  of  Campbell,  Saevil, 
and  others.  Be  u  fi  tlii»t  officer  on  arriving  at 
the  Astor  H'tuse,  and  could  not  afterward  be 
found. 

At  your  instan.;e  and  under  your  directions  I 
again  went  to  New  York.  .May  15,  with  C^mp- 
beli  and  tbe  S  r^iiaut-at- Arms,  to  subpoena  the 
other  witi'es-.  ^  and  proenve  their  attendance 
bef.ire  the  Jn  neiary  Coinoii^.tee. 

Snevil.  We.' i ill,  Wright.,  and  Patten  were 
found  and  sii^>pa3aned,  ai>d  I  returned  with 
Snevil  to  Wnshitigiou.  TD'5  others  failed  to 
appear.  S-iOVil  was  exaiained  by  tbe  C'lmmiiiee, 
and  fully  c  irroborared  Campbell  as  to  the  falsity 
aud  fabiR'-ition  of  the  depotiiious. 

Again  leltrring  you  to  the  copy  of  my  report 
to  the  Judiciary  Committee,  enclosed,  which 
fnroishes  in  greater  detail  the  action  taken  by 
me,  while  acting  under  yonr  direction  and  in- 
structi  I'je,  I  beg  leave  to  state  iu  eot elusion  that 
in  my  judgment  the  base  calumnies  with  which 
"tr'iitnrs,  confessed  perjurers,  and  suborners" 
are  jiursuiog  you  are  as  preposterous  as  atro- 
cious, and  will  result  in  increasing  instead  of 
lessening  the  enduring  confidence  of  all  true- 


15 


hearted  and  honest- minded  men  in  your  emi- 
nent fidelity  and  faithfuiness  as  a  Governmental 
officer,  and  your  undoubted  loyalty  as  a  citizen. 
I  Lave  the  honor  to  be,  very  respectfully,  your 
obedient  servant,  L.  C  Tuhneu, 

Judge  Advocate. 

War  Department, 
Washington  City,  November  8,  1866. 
Oen.  Joseph  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  General: 

General  :  I  have  the  honor  to  say  I  deem  it 
proper  to  inform  you  that  within  a  few  days,  and 
eince  Sanford  Conover's  arrest,  I  have  had  seve- 
ral conversations  with  him,  in  the  course  of 
which  I  brought  to  his  notice  and  exhibited  to 
him,  as  published,  the  various  letters  which  first 
appeared  in  the  New  York  Herald,  and  have 
since  been  copied  into  other  papers,  purporting 
to  be  from  or  to  him,  and  intended  by  their 
statements  and  intimations  to  criminate  your- 
self, and  desired  him  to  say  what  he  knew  in 
regard  to  them.  The  letters  to  which  1  refer 
may  be  described  as  follows,  viz :  one,  signed 
"M,"  dated  17th  April,  1860,  and  addressed  to 
Bald  Conover;  one  bearing  the  signature  of ''Wil- 
liam Campbell,"  and  addressed  to  Conover, 
under  date  of  "St.  Albans,  Vt.,  November  19, 
1865;"  one  signed  "Carter,"  and  addressed 
likewise  to  Conover,  dated  "Quartermaster's 
Olficp,  April  37,  1866;"  one  signed  "Joseph 
Snevil,"  addressed  to  Conover,  and  dated  "  West- 
che.-ter  House,  November  14,  1865;"  one  signed 
"3.  Conover,"  addressed  to  Patten,  and  dated 
"Epl  rata  Mountain  House,  June  8,  1866;"  and 
one  iJaied  "Philadelphia,  December  13,1865," 
Bignt-d  "8.  Conover,"  and  addressed  to  "Briga- 
dier General  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  General," 
and  proftBsicgto  have  enclosed  within  it  a  letter 
to  Said  Conover  from  "M.  N.  Harris,"  dated 
"Harrisburg,  December  11,  1865." 

Conover  declared  to  me  unhesitatingly  and 
distiLctly  that  he  had  written  no  such  letters 
to  jou  as  the  foregoing,  purporting  to  have  been 
written  by  him  to  yourself;  and,  farther,  he 
stated  that  he  had  not  received  from  the  parties 
above  named,  or  either  of  them,  any  such  letters 
as. those  above  set  forth,  and  which  profess  to 
have  bet-n  written  by  said  parties  to  said  Con- 
over, and  that  he  knew  nothing  in  regard  to 
them.  Wtiile  he  thus,  in  efftct,  declared  all 
thet-e  paptrs  to  be  fabricated  and  false,  he  in- 
sisted thai  he  did  not  know  by  whom  they  had 
been  manufactured  for  publication.  Several  of 
these  letters,  as  published,  will  be  found  set  out 


fully  in  the  depositions  of  Joseph  Hoare  and 
William  H.  Roberts,  recently  taken  at  my  office. 

Feeling  some  solicitude  to  know  what  motive 
could  have  prompted  Conover  to  suborn  the 
witnesses  produced  by  him  before  the  Bureau 
of  Military  Justice,  I  asked  him;  and  he  replied, 
and  requested  me  to  state  to  you,  that  it  was 
solely  a  desire  to  avenge  himself  on  Jeff.  Davis, 
by  whose  order,  he  said,  he  had  been  confined 
for  some  six  months  in  Castle  Thunder.  He 
alleged  that  not  only  had  he  been  thus  mal- 
treated, but  that  his  wife  had  also  been  insulted 
by  Davis.  He  also  assured  me  that  the  testi- 
mony he  gave  on  the  trial  of  the  assassins  of 
President  Lincoln  before  the  military  commis- 
sion was  true  in  every  particular,  and  asserted, 
again  and  again,  that  Davis  was  connected  with 
said  assassination,  and  as  to  that  there  was  no 
sort  of  question. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  very  respectfully,  your 
obedient  servant,  L.  C  Turner. 

Brevet  Colonel  and  Judge  Advocate. 

War  Department, 
Washington  City,  November  14,  1866. 

Sir  :  Your  letter  of  the  lltb  of  September, 
applying  for  a  court  of  inquiry  upon  certaia  im- 
putations therein  mentioned  as  made  against 
you,  of  official  misconduct  in  relation  to  ibe 
prosecution  of  Mrs.  Surratt  and  others,  charged 
with  the  assassination  of  the  late  Prc^iJent. 
Abraham  Lincoln,  and  in  the  preparation  of 
testimony  against  Jefferson  Davis  and- others, 
charged  with  complicity  in  said  crime,  has  been 
submitted  to  the  President,  who  deems  it  un- 
necessary for  your  vindication  to  order  a  court  of 
inquiry. 

In  communicating  the  President's  decision,  it 
is  proper  for  me  to  express  my  own  conviction 
that  all  charges  and  imputations  against  your 
official  conduct  and  character  are,  in  my  judg- 
ment, entirely  groundless.  So  far  as  I  have  any 
knowledge  or  information  your  official  duties,  as 
Judge  Advocate  General,  in  the  cases  referred  to 
and  in  all  others,  have  been  performed  fairly, 
justly,  and  with  distinguished  ability,  integrity, 
and  patriotism,  and  in  strict  conformity  with  the 
requirements  of  your  high  office  and  the  obliga- 
tions of  an  f  fflcer  and  a  gentleman. 
Your  obedient  servant, 

Edwin  M.  Stanton, 

Secretat-y  of  War. 
Brevet    Major    General  JosEPn  Holt,  Judge 

Advocate  General. 


v^ 


I 


w. 


